Disposed

R.K.Vinod v. Sunitha Jacob

Kerala HC29 Nov 2022Con.Case(C)/501/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court disposed of a contempt case where the first respondent, a Tahzildar, apologized for delay in complying with a prior judgment. The court recorded an undertaking for compliance within two weeks and closed the case while retaining liberty to rehear if terms are not met by 15.12.2022.

What did the court decide?

Contempt case closed; liberty to petitioner to seek rehearing if undertaking not complied with by 15.12.2022.

R.K.Vinod Vs Sunitha Jacob — Contempt of Court | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 29^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2022 / 8TH AGRAHAYANA, 1944

¶5

CON.CASE(C) NO. 501 OF 2022

¶6

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT WP(C) 18355/2021 OF HIGH COURT OF

¶7

KERALA

¶8

CONTEMPT PETITIONER/PETITIONER IN W.P.(C):

¶9

R.K.VINOD SON OF LATE KARTHIKEYAN AGED 57 YEARS, RAMADIYIL HOUSE, OCHAMTHURUTH P.O, KOCHI, PIN - 682508 BY ADV DENIZEN KOMATH

¶10

RESPONDENTS/3RD AND ADDL 5TH RESPONDENT IN W.P.(C):

¶11

1 SUNITHA JACOB (AGE AND NAME OF FATHER NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER)TAHZILDAR, TALUK OFFICE, FORT KOCHI, PIN - 682001

¶12

2 BENNY SEBASTIAN (AGE AND NAME OF THE FATHER NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER)TAHZILDAR (LAND RECORDS), TALUK OFFICE, FORT KOCHI, PIN - 682001

¶13

SMT.PARVATHY.K-GP

¶14

THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29.11.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

Con.Case (C) No. 501 of 2022

¶16

: 2 :

¶17

DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN, J.

¶18

=========================

¶19

Con.Case (C) No. 501 of 2022

¶20

========================== Dated this the 29^th November, 2022

¶21

JUDGMENT

¶22

When this contempt of Court case was taken up today, the learned Government Pleader - Smt.Parvathy Kottol, submitted that 1^st respondent is present in person, and that she apologizes for the delay in compliance of the directions in the judgment. She explained that the said respondent took office recently and was not aware of the time frame in the judgment; but that she has now taken all measures to comply with the directions therein, without any further delay, but not later than two weeks from now.

¶23

Though, this Court is not happy with the manner in which the directions of this Court have been dealt with by the respondents, I deem it appropriate to accede to the limited request of the learned Government Pleader; recording the undertaking that orders in terms of the judgment will be issued by the competent among them, within a period of two weeks from today.

¶24

Resultantly, I close this contempt case; however, leaving liberty to the petitioner to seek a rehearing, if orders in terms of the afore undertaking are not received by him on or before 15.12.2022.

¶25

Sd/-

¶26

DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN, JUDGE

¶27

anm

¶28

Con.Case (C) No. 501 of 2022

¶29

: 3 :

¶30

APPENDIX OF CON.CASE(C) 501/2022

¶31

PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure1 TRUE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE RELEVANT JUDGMENT IN WPC NO. 18355/2021 DATED 23/09/2021 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT. Annexure2 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE FORWARDING LETTER DATED 18/10/2021.

R.K.Vinod v. Sunitha Jacob

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

R.K.Vinod v. Sunitha Jacob

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Anver S R Vs Director Oftechnical Education

Anitha Kumar.S Vs the Lbs Centre for Science and Technology

Dr.Vinodu George Vs the Director, Lbs Centre for the Science and Technology

Bpcl Employees Co-Operative Society LTD.NO.226 Vs K.R.Santosh

K.R Santhosh Vs the B.P.C.L Employees Co-Operaive Society Ltd. NO.226

Shaji.K.G Vs Joint Registrar of Co-Operative Societies (General)